Friday, April 07, 2017

Responding to a Syrian chemical weapons attack on Tuesday that left scores dead, the United States initiated a military strike Thursday on an airbase in Syria, multiple U.S. officials have confirmed, launching 59 missiles at an air base in the country.

The Pentagon said that the airstrike, which targeted Shayrat Air Base in Homs Province -- where the chemical attack was initiated earlier in the week -- struck multiple targets with tomahawk missiles launched between 8:40 and 8:50 p.m. Eastern Standard Time, from destroyers USS Porter and USS Ross in the Mediterranean Sea.

President Donald Trump said the strike was in the "vital national security interest" of the U.S.

In a statement to Syrian state TV, the Syrian army said the attack had left six people dead and several injured, in addition to "big material losses."

Russia has reacted angrily after the US launched a missile strike on a Syrian government air base.

US officials said the base had been used to launch a chemical weapons attack in north-western Syria that left dozens of civilians dead on Tuesday.

But Russia, which backs President Bashar al-Assad, condemned the US strike and suspended a deal designed to avoid mid-air collisions over Syria.

Hillary Clinton also stated publicly that she would have attacked the Syrian airbase. (However I think we all know that she would have sought approval from Congress first. After all this IS Hillary Clinton we are talking about.)

Another thing to note is that Trump was completely against this same response back in 2013, after a chemical weapons attack left 1,400 dead.

So I guess 80 dead on his watch justifies a military response by not over a thousand dead during the Obama Administration?

And finally a certain MOH recipient is right on board with this decision.

Good on @realDonaldTrump for showing the world that America will no longer stand by and watch this barbaric behavior on innocent people.

"US Strategic Command is linking to Breitbart "News." This is getting really bad, folks." While the article tweeted by Strategic Command is not necessarily as bad as the myriad of other Breitbart controversies, it’s still quite concerning to see a powerful military branch use such a discredited publication as a credible new source.

Bingo.1) The Russia story starts to grow legs;2) Trump signals to Syria that the US won't interfere;3) Assad gasses his citizens;4) Trump spends $75M on a symbolic strike;5) Russia makes a show of protesting;6) Trump gets hailed for taking decisive action (formerly blocked by GOP);7) Now we're talking about Syria.

..... Many Republicans may find themselves in an awkward spot Friday as they justify their support for Trump's missile strike after suggesting similar actions by the Obama administration would be unconstitutional.

Stalwart Trump ally Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.), along with more than 100 colleagues, signed a 2013 letter that sharply warned Obama against a unilateral attack. "Engaging our military in Syria when no direct threat to the United States exists and without prior congressional authorization would violate the separation of powers that is clearly delineated in the Constitution," they wrote.

Other GOP signatories included Rep. Lynn Jenkins of Kansas, who applauded Trump as "decisive," and Rep. Joe Wilson of South Carolina, who commended Trump for his "swift action." A slew of other Republicans who praised Trump — including Don Young of Alaska, Martha Roby of Alabama, Roger Williams of Texas — opposed or leaned heavily against Obama's request to authorize the use of force.......

Didn’t donnie say something in the past similar to what kind of a raid is it if they tell the “enemy” they are coming?

Guess that doesn’t apply to the Syrians and of course he let his buddy putin know what was coming.

Beginning to look like a FAKE RAID for his poll numbers.

And his FAKE speech yesterday wasn’t convincing, I think the American public is being played. ========================Syrian military knew the US raid was coming and evacuated personnel and equipment: ABC News

.....ABC News reported early Friday that the Syrian military seemed to know that something might happen. Eyewitnesses claim the military then evacuated personnel and moved equipment before the strike took place.

Trump sent in troops -a hush hush deal recently to Syria. This was not even revealed to Congress or the media or inquiry of any kind. Could Trump have known of planned chemical attack as Russian troops are embroiled in every military aspect of Syrian military?

Pentagon called the Kremlin in advance to let them know of pending attack. However, Congress was not notified or asked?

Russia switched off their retaliatory launch mode. No reports of main terminals where jets and equipment housed...just runways. Damage looked like firecrackers instead of massive destruction. Fatalities were minor with no news of any Russian deaths as of yet.

So, just a prediction. At this point, negotiations with Russia will remove Assad, (no big deal...like minded killer will take his place), U.S. ignores Crimea and Ukraine, and lifts sanctions. Then, Russia gets out of debt and poor economy by oil prices rising. Exxon can go ahead with Rosnoft and drill the hell out of the Arctic, etc. Tillerson and Trump and other oligarchs get richer and more autocratic as Russia again becomes a world economic and military power. Then Russia starts invasion of the Baltic states ad infinitum......and destroys NATO balance. Europe then dependent on Russian petro as source.

This is a perfect ruse to deflect the low presidency approval polls and the Trump-Russia election exposure. It is the exact long game Trump was put into the office he illegitimately holds because of Putin's game plan. Putin will finish Trump off once he is done with him.

In the meantime, we will be lucky not to have North Korea bombing us while China keeps building strongholds in every ocean except the Arctic.

The ONLY way to stop this is to call the congressional asshats and vote next year.

“This is worse than anything we have ever seen. Something is shifting — a lot more [innocent Muslim] civilians are dying, and it’s happening on Donald Trump’s watch.”…

Over the past couple of days Americans, including Trump, have made an issue over the deaths of innocent Syrians, and displaced Iraqis, allegedly killed by the Syrian military using chemical weapons. Of course it is a big issue, but while the Americans and the international community are outraged over the deaths of an estimated 86 innocent civilians in Syria, no-one is the least bit concerned, much less outraged, over the estimated 1,472 civilian casualties, all Muslim casualties, in the month of March alone and all at the hands of the United States of America under the Trump regime.

One can fairly say it would be a sure and safe bet that none of the family members of either the 86 innocent Syrian civilians or 1,472 innocent Syrian and Iraqi civilians really care about how their innocent loved ones were massacred; they just know their loved ones died. And yet all the attention is being focused solely on the 86 deaths by chemical weapons as opposed to 1,472 civilians killed by American-made and delivered bombs in the month of March alone.

But in recent interviews with intelligence and military officers and consultants past and present, I found intense concern, and on occasion anger, over what was repeatedly seen as the deliberate manipulation of intelligence. One high-level intelligence officer, in an email to a colleague, called the administration’s assurances of Assad’s responsibility a ‘ruse’. The attack ‘was not the result of the current regime’, he wrote. A former senior intelligence official told me that the Obama administration had altered the available information – in terms of its timing and sequence – to enable the president and his advisers to make intelligence retrieved days after the attack look as if it had been picked up and analysed in real time, as the attack was happening. The distortion, he said, reminded him of the 1964 Gulf of Tonkin incident, when the Johnson administration reversed the sequence of National Security Agency intercepts to justify one of the early bombings of North Vietnam. The same official said there was immense frustration inside the military and intelligence bureaucracy: ‘The guys are throwing their hands in the air and saying, “How can we help this guy” – Obama – “when he and his cronies in the White House make up the intelligence as they go along?”’

Trump’s military theater could have funded the programs he wants to eliminate

Donald Trump launched U.S. military action in Syria last night which involved 59 Tomahawk missiles, but strangely, they were aimed at unimportant targets. Bashar al-Assad’s ability to continue using chemical weapons doesn’t appear to have been hindered, nor does that appear to have been Trump’s goal. This was essentially military theater aimed at looking vaguely presidential. And it was an extraordinarily expensive stunt that could have funded some of the programs Trump is insisting we get rid of.

This 2014 Department of Defense report pegs the cost at at $1.59 million per Tomahawk missile, based on its request for 196 missiles at a total of $312.5 million on page 5-14 (link). Various media outlets report different costs for the Tomahawk, some higher, some lower. But if we go with the military’s own report, the 59 Tomahawk missiles deployed in Syria last night – at $1.59 million apiece – cost a total of $93.81 million. The overall operational cost is likely to come in much higher; this represents just the cost to build the missiles involved.

The Donald Trump administration recently announced that it plans to zero out federal funding for Meals on Wheels. According to the official financial statement released by Meals on Wheels for the year 2015 (link), the most recent year available, its total expenses for the year were $7,520,538. That means the $93.81 million cost of the Tomahawk missiles used last night could have fully funded Meals on Wheels national operations for the next twelve years, trough 2029.

However, the federal government only funds a fraction of the Meals on Wheels budget to begin with. According to that same 2015 financial statement (link), just $237,252 came from “Government grants.” So the Tomahawk missiles used in Syria last night could have covered the government’s annual contribution to Meals on Wheels for the next four hundred years.

As I’ve explained elsewhere (link), the evidence suggests that last night’s U.S. attack in Syria was mere coordinated military theater between Trump and Russia, aimed at boosting Trump’s approval rating and allowing him to claim not to be a Russian puppet, while doing nothing to impede Assad’s ability to continue his chemical attacks. When you attack an air force base but don’t bother to blow up the airstrips, you’re not attempting that base out of business.

So, just WHAT are the 'vital interests' of the US that we attack a sovereign country? Also, too: WHY were the Russians and the Syrians warned in advance? After all, they were able to remove vital equipment from said airbase before we hit them.

I guess, the orange one finally got himself the war he wanted, so his 'approval numbers' will go sky high after this.

How did Donald Trump know to build up U.S. troops in Syria just BEFORE the chemical gas attack?

Did Trump know the Syria gas attack was coming?

On Tuesday April 4th, Syrian President Bashar al-Assad launched a chemical gas attack on his own people, slaughtering children in horrific fashion and shocking the world in the process. But at least one person didn’t appear to have been surprised or caught off guard. The usually politically tongue-tied Trump had an unusually eloquent verbal response ready to go. More relevantly, he’d already begun building up U.S. troops in Syria just before the gas attack.

Senator Chris Murphy said “No one actually knows how many troops are inside Syria now, because the administration has largely tried to keep the build-up a secret” in a Huffington Post op-ed he wrote just ten days before the gas attack in Syria (link). Then, on her MSNBC show this week, Rachel Maddow also emphasized the unusual nature of the U.S. military refusing to disclose how many troops it was positioning in Syria. This buildup conveniently put the U.S. military in an ideal position to launch any response it wanted to the gas attack – but that gas attack came with no warning.

Trump is a Russian spy

So did Donald Trump, despite his total lack of military experience and his consistent unwillingness to listen to military experts, just happen to make a prescient random guess that Assad was about to launch the kind of uniquely horrifying attack on the children of his own nation, such that it would dictate an immediate U.S. military response? And why did Trump insist on keeping that troop buildup such a secret that even a U.S. Senator on the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations was unable to get his hands on a deployment count?

This goes back to my earlier working theory that the Syria gas attack and Donald Trump’s military response simply don’t add up, unless Vladimir Putin orchestrated all of it in order to help a faltering Trump get back on his political feet (link). I don’t want to be right about this. But the preponderance of the evidence says I probably am.

U.S. missiles did as little damage in Syria as possible, and Russia chose not to use S-400 defense

Russia’s S-400 surface-to-air weaponry could have taken out U.S. Tomahawk missiles

Donald Trump ordered the United States military to fire fifty or more powerful Tomahawk missiles into Syria tonight, creating visibly explosive fireworks in what looked on TV to be an overwhelming response to Bashar al-Assad’s chemical gas attack on his own people. But a closer examination reveals that the U.S. missiles inflicted minimal damage. And despite Russia’s built in ability to have blown those missiles out of the sky, it chose not to do so – suggesting this was all mere military theater.

The U.S. Tomahawk missiles used in the attack could have been struck down by the S-300 and S-400 surface-to-air weaponry which Russia already had in place in Syria, specifically to defend against this kind of attack (source: Washington Post). But Russia chose not to do so. That suggests Russia knew in advance that the U.S. missiles would not be imposing serious damage. Russia could only have known this if the U.S. told it as much in advance.

Accordingly, NBC News is reporting on-air tonight that at least one Syrian air base, the U.S. strike only took out planes and fueling stations, while leaving the two airstrips fully intact. The airstrips would have required significant reconstruction, but the equipment can theoretically be replaced tomorrow if Russia opts to bring in replacements. So with the airstrips intact, the Syrian air force is still fully in business.

Tonight’s U.S. attack seemed tailor made to look fierce to casual viewers at home, while inflicting as little real damage to Assad’s air force capability as possible. Trump went out of his way not to substantially impair Assad, and in return Russia decided not to defend the attack on its close ally Syria. For that matter, Russia seemed to have already known what the U.S. would hit when it made the decision not to take out the incoming missiles.

If I’m right, and I probably am, then Trump just became a genocidal war criminal

...The U.S. attack seemed tailor made to look fierce to casual viewers at home, while inflicting as little real damage to Assad’s air force capability as possible. Trump went out of his way not to substantially impair Assad, and in return Russia went out of its way to allow the U.S. attack to happen. For that matter, Russia seemed to have already known what the U.S. would hit when it made the decision not to take out the incoming missiles. Regardless of any public jawing between the U.S. and Russia tonight, this reeks of carefully crafted military theater.

Combine that with the reports this week from Rachel Maddow on her MSNBC show that the U.S. military had already been building up troops in Syria before the gas attack, and it strongly suggests Donald Trump knew he would soon be taking military action there. Further, Trump tried to keep the troop buildup a secret, suggesting he didn’t want anyone to figure out that he already knew the gas attack was coming.

The U.S. has begun war in Syria tonight, and Donald Trump is screwing around at a golf resort

There’s a reason the President of the United States lives in the White House, even though everyone else who works there goes home at night. Even when the President steps away from Washington D.C., it’s generally to specific vacation entities that have already long been equipped to function as surrogate White Houses. Because you just never know when history’s biggest moments are going to suddenly need the President to be in a room with his most important military advisers.

Except in this instance, Donald Trump knew precisely when that moment was going to come, because he’s the one who’s been lining up U.S. military in Syria. He’s the one who’s been stacking a secret number of ground troops over there. And he’s the one who wanted the military action that’s now underway tonight. So where is Trump right now? A thousand miles away at his own private golf resort.

Yes, he has a built-in excuse lined up. He had already scheduled a visit with Chinese President Xi Jinping for today at Mar-a-Lago. State visits can’t necessarily be moved easily at the last minute, even when something like the Syria chemical attack suddenly changes things. But this is why the President lives at the White House and conducts state business there. Dragging the President of China to his own private golf course in Florida isn’t just an egomaniacal way of showing off. It’s also a way to get caught with his pants down, and get Americans killed...

A Russian warship has entered the Mediterranean Sea and is headed toward the two United States Navy destroyers that launched an attack on a Syrian air base, according to a report from Fox News.

According to the report, the Russian ship came from the Black Sea and went through the Bosphorus Strait to reach the Mediterranean. There is no indication yet what the warship’s intentions are or if it is headed on a collision course with the two Navy destroyers.

I too feel that "Something's rotten in Denmark". This whole thing feels incredibly staged. My only question is if Trump knew that the "incident" that Putin put Assad up to would include the genocide of babies and children. If he did, then the electric chair is too good for him. Also, if Trump colluded with Putin on this, then Jared and Princess Complicit probably knew about it too. Amazing how those two can look so wholesome while most likely being up to their ears in Russian mafia money-laundering, etc.

In His Own Words from 2013, Trump’s Unauthorized Attack on Syria Was ‘A Big Mistake’

...It is unlikely in the extreme that a Republican Congress will condemn Trump’s abuse of power any more than they will willingly investigate his ties to Russia, or force him to release his tax returns, or submit to a medical examination to prove he is even fit to hold office.

They didn’t even bother to vet his appointees. Why on earth would anyone think they would question his decisions? They haven’t and they won’t, not as long as there is a ghost of a chance of getting everything they want out of Donald Trump first.

In a word, you don’t have to be a cynic to be cynical about Donald Trump’s decision to attack Syria. After all, even he said it was a mistake.

Congressional Democrats and activists are criticizing President Trump for launching a missile strike against Syria without congressional authorization which means that Trump illegally escalated the US military's role in Syria.

...The activists aren’t alone. Democratic congressional leaders immediately pointed out that Trump acted unilaterally without the approval of Congress. The only thing that Trump’s missile strike has accomplished is that it escalated the US role in the Syrian conflict. True to character, the Trump administration appears to have taken a knee-jerk unilateral reaction without a long-term strategy.

Donald Trump wants Americans to be blinded by flag waving into not asking the critical questions of what his unauthorized executive action means, and what the next step is in Syria?

It Only Took 76 Days For Donald Trump To Start A New War In The Middle EastIt Only Took 76 Days For Donald Trump To Start A New War In The Middle East

...Not all of the details are known at this hour, but what is evident is that Trump – or whoever made this decision while the president remains at his non-secure Mar-a-Lago resort – was more interested in making a symbolic, political move than he was in making a thoughtful decision that would have a positive, lasting impact on the situation in Syria and the region more generally.

It’s still not clear whether America’s allies or the U.S. Congress were informed by the administration before they launched this offensive in Syria. It’s also important to remember that Trump had no approval, whether from the United Nations or Congress, to bomb a sovereign country.

This is still a developing situation, but it certainly didn’t take the new president long to start a new war in the Middle East.

Republicans Move Toward New Middle East War As John McCain Urges Trump To Strike Syria

On MSNBC's MTP Daily, Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) urged Trump to strike Syria without authorization from Congress. McCain also outlined a plan that would be a repeat of the mistakes the US made in Iraq.

...en. McCain made three points that sounded like a repeat of the Iraq war.

1). McCain said that Trump could strike Syria without Congressional authorization and that the US needed a new AUMF (Authorization for the Use of Military Force) presumably to cover the new war in the Middle East that some Republicans already have in mind.

2). Sen. McCain wants the US to take out the Assad regime’s air force, create safe zones, and arm and supply rebels.

3). John McCain wants the US to rebuild Syria after the war.

Mccain wants the US military heavily involved in Syria.

It is a small jump from arming rebels and air strikes to sending in ground troops. The Trump administration has refused to rule out military strikes in North Korea and Syria. As their domestic agenda fails, Trump is increasingly showing signs that he will try to boost his popularity through a military conflict. Despite all of his bashing of the Iraq war, it looks like Trump is itching to be a wartime president.

Sen. McCain was already laying out the strategy for the next US war in the Middle East. McCain never mentioned international coalitions or cooperation, because it appears that America is back to being led by a president who wants to go it alone in the Middle East.

The clouds of war are building, and it seems it is only a matter of when, not if, Donald Trump and the Republican Party will repeat their many mistakes of Iraq.

President Trump is considering a broad shakeup of his White House that could include the replacement of White House Chief of Staff Reince Priebus and the departure of chief strategist Steve Bannon, aides and advisers tell us.

A top aide to Trump said he's contemplating major changes, but that the situation is very fluid and the timing uncertain: "Things are happening, but it's very unclear the president's willing to pull that trigger."

Insiders tell me that the possibilities for chief of staff include:

House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.), who developed a bond with Trump as one of the earlier congressional leaders to support him, and remains a confidant. Wayne Berman of Blackstone Group, a Washington heavy-hitter who was an Assistant Secretary of Commerce under President George H.W. Bush, and a key adviser on eight presidential campaigns. David Urban of the Washington advisory firm American Continental Group, and a former chief of staff to the late Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.). Urban helped Trump win an upset victory in Pennsylvania, and was in constant cellphone contact with the candidate throughout the campaign. Gary Cohn, Trump's economic adviser and the former #2 at Goldman Sachs, who has built a formidable team and internal clout.

The West Wing "Game of Thrones" has been raging ever since Trump took office. But the war between the nationalists and the moderates, led by Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump, burst into the open this week after Bannon was taken off the National Security Council, setting off a torrent of leaks against him.

Syria's armed forces were warned about the U.S. military action hours before the missile strike on the Shayrat airbase, AFP reports. A Syrian military source said they "learned of the American threat and the expected military bombardment on Syrian territory," but were not told exactly where the strike would take place:

We took precautions in more than one military point, including in Shayrat airbase. We moved a number of airplanes towards other areas. — A Syrian military source told AFP

This map shows which groups control which areas in Syria and Iraq, according to analysts at IHS Jane's Conflict Monitor. The Islamic State has lost territory to advancing Iraqi government forces and Kurdish groups, while Syria remains embroiled in a six-year-long civil war.

International powers are weighing in on the U.S. missile strike on a Syrian military airbase late Thursday night. With conflicting interests as the Syria crisis comes to a head, see where different global powers stand on U.S. intervention:Keep reading 671 words

In support of U.S. strike

Canada: "Canada fully supports the United States' limited and focused action to degrade the Assad regime's ability to launch chemical weapons attacks against innocent civilians, including many children," PM Justin Trudeau said in a statement. Saudi Arabia: The Saudi Foreign Ministry expressed its "full support ... for the American military operations on military targets in Syria," according to a statement from the Saudi Press Agency. An official source in the foreign ministry also noted "the courageous decision of US President Donald Trump, which represents a response to crimes this regime has committed towards its people in light of the inaction of the international community in stopping it in its tracks." Turkey: "We welcome the US operation," Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusogulu said, calling the airstrikes "a positive response to the Assad regime's war crimes." Turkey's presidential spokesman Ibrahim Kalin also called for a no-fly zone creation of safe zones in Syria. Australia: PM Malcolm Turnbull said the country "strongly supports the swift and just response of the US" to the chemical attack. He added that the US' response was "calibrated, proportionate, and targeted," which will "send a strong message to the Assad regime." Israel: "Israel fully supports President Trump's decision," the office of PM Benjamin Netanyahu tweeted. "In both word and action, @POTUS sent a strong and clear message today that the use and spread of chemical weapons will not be tolerated." Japan: "The Japanese government supports the US government's resolve that it will never tolerate the spread and use of chemical weapons," Japanese PM Shinzo Abe told reporters. U.K.: "The U.K. Government fully supports the U.S. action, which we believe was an appropriate response to the barbaric chemical weapons attack launched by the Syrian regime, and is intended to deter further attacks," a U.K. government spokesperson said in a statement. Jordan: Government spokesman Mohammad Momani said Jordan considers the strike "a necessary and appropriate response to the non-stop targeting of innocent civilians" with weapons of mass destruction, and reiterated that the Syrian chemical attack was a "inhumane and heinous act." Spain: The Spanish government issued a statement that said "The action taken by the United States in recent hours against a military base in Syria is a measured and proportionate response to the use of chemical weapons against the civil population of the country by the Syrian army." Italy: Italian Foreign Minister Angelino Alfano said in a statement on Friday "Italy understands the reasons for a US military action, proportionate and well-timed, as a response to an unacceptable feeling of impunity, and as a deterrence signal against the risk of further use of chemical weapons by Assad." Germany: German Chancellor Angela Merkel said "This attack by the United States of America is understandable, given the aspect of the war crimes, given the suffering of innocent people and given the logjam in the UN Security Council."

"“highly ineffective,” claiming that only 23 of the 59 Tomahawk missiles reached their intended target. He also accused the U.S. of relying on fake news reports of a Syrian regime chemical attack against civilians in Idlib province.""“Trump rebalanced the field on Syria, and that could bring more opportunities for the Russians and Americans, as difficult as it seems now,” he said. “In crisis, there’s opportunity.”

I was just now watching the Russian ambassador to the UN speak about Mosel. He articulated exactly what I first thought when I heard of the Syrian strike on the news: Where are the photos of all the innocent little children and civilians who were killed in Mosel? Where's the outrage? Where was Kushner's conscience then?

Funnily enough Trump blasted Obama on Twitter, back in 2012, accusing him of launching airstrikes in order to boost failing popularity ratings...Trump's twitter history shows his hand every time and basically predicts his future actions.

Why are we taking the word of Syrian rebel media, who are known for filming outrageous acts against the soldiers & local population and showing them to the world to terrify others? They just did another outrageous attack filmed it just changing the plot and the actors for this production. For some reason they are believed.

About Me

This blog is dedicated to finding the truth, exposing the lies, and holding our politicians and leaders accountable when they fall far short of the promises that they have made to both my fellow Alaskans and the American people.